Battle of the Bands, The Beatles or The Stones?

Just wondering who you prefer?

It is said that the Beatles were extremely influential, and the world had never seen the like before. This may well be true, although I'd say you really had to be around at that time to fully appreciate this.

RE: Battle of the Bands, The Beatles or The Stones?2008/05/15 21:07:35
(permalink)

I'm afraid I voted for option 3. I like a few songs from each but from the huge output of each I don't think that really means much. If it got to the stage that somebody was threatening to gouge out my eyeballs unless I chose, then I guess I'd go for the Stones. There still hugely overrated though...

RE: Battle of the Bands, The Beatles or The Stones?2008/05/15 21:38:03
(permalink)

Rolling Stones and I'm into my 40th year of'em, seen'em 5 times ..they win simple...40 years biggest grossing touring band..who's to say whether the Beatles would have maintained this level of popularity..Stones have done it the Beatles haven't...excellent live infact amazing...

It's hard to be humble when I'm so great...

If you even dream of beating me you'd better wake up and apologize...Muhammad Ali

RE: Battle of the Bands, The Beatles or The Stones?2008/05/15 22:30:36
(permalink)

I can listen to the music now and I know what I like but having been born in '66 I would say I'm not old enough to appreciate what it was all about back then. From the two I prefer The Stones but from bands of that era I like the music of The Who.

RE: Battle of the Bands, The Beatles or The Stones?2008/05/15 23:11:58
(permalink)

The Stones were a proper rock band doing blues rock which I love. The Beatles had a very boring image, and I find most of their catalogue vastly overrated. I was in a pub the other day when 'Paperback Writer' came on the radio (a song I had heard of but never heard) and I just thought 'Why is this song famous? It's boring!'